On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 12:41:29PM +0200, Andreas Färber wrote: > Am 18.06.2013 12:23, schrieb Michael S. Tsirkin: > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 07:43:11PM +1000, [email protected] > > wrote: > >> From: Peter Crosthwaite <[email protected]> > >> > >> > >> This series enables QOM super class access and demostrates some usages. > >> Replaces the save->override->call via FooClass technique, to reduce > >> some of the boiler plate in recently fully QOMified devices. > >> > >> Applied the change to ARM CPU, MB CPU and some of Andreas's recently > >> QOMified i386 devices, all which have the save->override->call issue. > >> ARMCPU I've done a brief test on and seems to work. > >> > >> ARM CPU was particularly difficult, as it has 3 layers of heirachy, > >> where a non-concrete class (TYPE_ARM_CPU) need to super class itself > >> (to TYPE_CPU). This sees the need for super-classers to specify their > >> expected base class level. See patches for illustration. > >> > >> The main future work to the series is to apply the change pattern to > >> the reset of the tree > > > > Looks good to me overall. > > Some nits: > > - Super is an immediate parent in java and python. > > - One of the design points of QOM is that it let > > you ignore which class is a parent and which is a child. > > All casts look the same. > > > > So, why do we need the new APIs with _SUPER? > > What's wrong with simple > > object_class_by_name() > > and casting to that? > > I guess the idea was to avoid open-coding that multiple times, but I > think I would then prefer something more local like > > #define ARM_CPU_SUPER_CLASS() \ > object_class_get_parent(object_class_by_name(TYPE_ARM_CPU))
s/SUPER_CLASS/PARENT_CLASS/ Super class also confusingly means "very good". > and then use > > DEVICE_CLASS(ARM_CPU_SUPER_CLASS()) > or > CPU_CLASS(ARM_CPU_SUPER_CLASS()) > > as needed. What do you think? > > Andreas > > -- > SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany > GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer; HRB 16746 AG Nürnberg
